Development and Validation of Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale for College Students

Abstract

This study described the process of developing and validating the College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale (CCSS) that can be used to assess college students’ beliefs in their ability to perform essential tasks in chemistry. In the first phase, data collected from 363 college students provided evidence for the validity and reliability of the new scale. Three dimensions emerged: self-efficacy for cognitive skills, self-efficacy for psychomotor skills, and self-efficacy for everyday applications. In the second phase, data collected from an independent sample of 353 college students confirmed the factorial structure of the 21-item CCSS. The Cronbach alpha coefficients ranged from 0.82 to 0.92. In addition, each dimension of the CCSS had moderate and significant correlations with student chemistry achievement and differentiated between major and non-major students. Followed by the additional validation studies, the CCSS will serve as a valuable tool for both instructors and researchers in science education to assess college students’ chemistry self-efficacy beliefs.

Keywords

Self-efficacy Chemistry self-efficacy Scale development Scale validation College students

Notes

Acknowledgement

We would like to acknowledge the help of Serdar Atılgan for his assistance with the collection of the data for this study and thank to Prof. Dr. Anita Woolfolk Hoy for her valuable comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Appendix

The College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale

Directions: This questionnaire is designed to help us gain a better understanding of the kinds of things that create difficulties for students in chemistry. Please indicate your opinion about each of the statements below. Please do not skip any item. Your answers are confidential.

THANKS FOR YOUR HELP ☺

Very poorly

Poorly

Average

Well

Very well

1. To what extent can you explain chemical laws and theories?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2. How well can you choose an appropriate formula to solve a chemistry problem?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

3. How well can you establish the relationship between chemistry and other sciences?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

4. How well can you describe the structure of an atom?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

5. How well can you work with chemicals?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6. How well can you describe the properties of elements by using periodic table?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

7. How well can you read the formulas of elements and compounds?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

8. To what extent can you propose solutions to everyday problems by using chemistry?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

9. How well can you interpret chemical equations?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10. How well can you explain the particulate nature of matter?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

11. How well can you construct laboratory apparatus?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

12. To what extent can you explain everyday life by using chemical theories?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

13. How well can you collect data during the chemistry laboratory?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

14. How well can you interpret graphs/charts related to chemistry?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

15. How well can you use the equipment in the chemistry laboratory?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

16. How well can you understand the news/documentary you watched on television related to chemistry?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

17. How well can you interpret data during the laboratory sessions?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

18. How well can you write a laboratory report summarizing main findings?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

19. How well can you solve chemistry problems?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

20. How well can you carry out experimental procedures in the chemistry laboratory?

Czerniak, C. M. (1990). A study of self-efficacy, anxiety, and science knowledge in pre-service elementary teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA, April.Google Scholar

DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future (The report of a seminar series funded by the Nuffield Foundation). London: King’s College London, School of Education.Google Scholar